PDA

View Full Version : If Scott's latest mock came true...


D-Unit
03-22-2011, 12:48 AM
What would you prefer?

M.O.T.H.
03-22-2011, 01:15 AM
I'd take Smith and Moore/Ras-I. haha.

We could do much worse than Watt and Cannon, though. I wouldnt mind that at all.

TheFinisher
03-22-2011, 08:40 AM
I'd be pretty happy with Watt and Cannon, but Peterson is a generational type talent in the secondary. He's the type of player you can build around on defense for the next decade, a 2nd round pick would not stop me from adding him.

J-Mike88
03-22-2011, 08:47 AM
I'd be pretty happy with Watt and Cannon, but Peterson is a generational type talent in the secondary. He's the type of player you can build around on defense for the next decade, a 2nd round pick would not stop me from adding him.
Nah, as good as Champ Bailey, and Nmamdi have been, you need to build a good deep team, not just get that great CB.

Plus there are no guarantees that PP will be that great. We've seen "can't miss" prospects turn into just decent or good guys. Or even worse.

D-Unit
03-22-2011, 01:30 PM
Nah, as good as Champ Bailey, and Nmamdi have been, you need to build a good deep team, not just get that great CB.

Plus there are no guarantees that PP will be that great. We've seen "can't miss" prospects turn into just decent or good guys. Or even worse.
Wait, I think you're not matching the value of Watt/Cannon to PP correctly. I get your point about the importance of building a good deep team, but it doesn't have a direct correlation of PP to Watt/Cannon. If we kept Watt/Cannon, THEN are we a good deep team? The answer is still no. An extra pick (the 2nd rounder that you're giving up) doesn't all of a sudden make you a "good deep team". So you can't say that giving up those 2 players/picks for Peterson is a valid point in building your case. It's slightly marginal, but not significant. If we were giving up 3 or 4 picks for Peterson, then you start to have a good argument. But losing 1 extra pick doesn't.

Remember when we kept trading down in 2009 and kept picking up extra picks? What good did that philosophy of building "depth" do for us? It busted in our face.

And you can infer that PP might bust, but so could Watt and Cannon too. So that point doesn't hold much weight either. Players like Watt and Cannon are in every draft. Peterson is a rare DB prospect.

Trogdor
03-22-2011, 02:45 PM
Watt/Cannon please.

No thanks on trading up for PP. Although as Moth mentioned I'd be MUCH more inclined to vote for a mock with Smith sitting at the top of our draft ;)

D-Unit
03-22-2011, 03:13 PM
Watt/Cannon please.

No thanks on trading up for PP. Although as Moth mentioned I'd be MUCH more inclined to vote for a mock with Smith sitting at the top of our draft ;)
I'd be interested to hear your reasoning.

Macarthur
03-22-2011, 03:52 PM
If our 2nd is all it would take to get PP, hell yes! That's as much a no-brainer as there is.

Having said that, If we aren't able to get PP, I would not be happy with Watt and Cannon. Let me rephrase that - They are both good players, and I LOVE Cannon, I would prefer over those two to trade down. If we could still get Cannon in the 2nd and possibly end up with Kerrigan or Clayborn AND get another pick in the top 80 or so to turn into someone like Curtis Brown, Dowling, bruce carter or something like that.

So, instead of Watt and Cannon, How does this sound:

Clayborn
Cannon
Curtis Brown/Jerrnigan/Ijalana

leroyisgod
03-22-2011, 04:50 PM
As much as I want to say PP, I'd go Watt/Cannon. PP is the sexy pick, but I'm gonna go with my gut and say the rebuilding of the defense isn't done with one guy.

D-Unit
03-22-2011, 06:18 PM
If our 2nd is all it would take to get PP, hell yes! That's as much a no-brainer as there is.

Having said that, If we aren't able to get PP, I would not be happy with Watt and Cannon. Let me rephrase that - They are both good players, and I LOVE Cannon, I would prefer over those two to trade down. If we could still get Cannon in the 2nd and possibly end up with Kerrigan or Clayborn AND get another pick in the top 80 or so to turn into someone like Curtis Brown, Dowling, bruce carter or something like that.

So, instead of Watt and Cannon, How does this sound:

Clayborn
Cannon
Curtis Brown/Jerrnigan/Ijalana
I would still like PP over those 3. Those are 3 guys who are all replaceable.

D-Unit
03-22-2011, 06:21 PM
As much as I want to say PP, I'd go Watt/Cannon. PP is the sexy pick, but I'm gonna go with my gut and say the rebuilding of the defense isn't done with one guy.
Does the rebuilding of the defense end with JJ Watt and Marcus Cannon? No, right? Let's compare apples to apples instead of inferring that we just gave up our entire draft and ability to rebuild the defense by trading our 1st and 2nders for Peterson.

The question is would you rather have Watt/Cannon or Peterson. Not our entire draft vs Peterson.

TheFinisher
03-22-2011, 06:48 PM
Giving up a 2nd rounder is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

Bottom line, Peterson is an elite talent... far and away the best player in this class. There are certain guys like that, and Dez Bryant is another one, who are just better than everybody else. The more Blue Chip guys you have on your team, the better your chance of winning is because they're going to make more plays.

leroyisgod
03-23-2011, 08:46 AM
Does the rebuilding of the defense end with JJ Watt and Marcus Cannon? No, right? Let's compare apples to apples instead of inferring that we just gave up our entire draft and ability to rebuild the defense by trading our 1st and 2nders for Peterson.

The question is would you rather have Watt/Cannon or Peterson. Not our entire draft vs Peterson.

I'd rather have Watt/Cannon. We would be addressing the line on both sides of the ball which need help. Getting Peterson would be great, but you only address CB which isn't necessarily #1, #2 or even really #3 on the off-season priority list.

leroyisgod
03-23-2011, 08:48 AM
Giving up a 2nd rounder is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

Bottom line, Peterson is an elite talent... far and away the best player in this class. There are certain guys like that, and Dez Bryant is another one, who are just better than everybody else. The more Blue Chip guys you have on your team, the better your chance of winning is because they're going to make more plays.

I agree, but you need to have enough good quality guys as well. Look at teams like the Patriots when they were winning super bowls. They were stock piled full of blue chippers. They had 1 or 2 blue chippers and a lot of good quality role players. It's just the sexy thing to want to go after a guy like PP.

Macarthur
03-23-2011, 09:06 AM
I would still like PP over those 3. Those are 3 guys who are all replaceable.

I think I said in my first sentence that I would take PP if all it took was a 2nd. I'm offering this as an alternative because I think it would take more than that and I just don't envision us doing it.

M.O.T.H.
03-23-2011, 11:38 AM
Give me more players. I like Peterson as well...but we could use a lot of new talent, and there is a great deal of talent to be had at the top of the first two rounds.

E-Man
03-23-2011, 01:41 PM
I love Paterson, but not enough for that. If they traded up for him I won't complain, but I'd rather go with Watt and Cannon since the more likely event would be trading down, getting a couple of picks, and taking Watt cheaper. I still like Prince better than Peterson, and I'd rather get him and Cannon, but Watt is a pretty good player I like too.

thule
03-23-2011, 04:42 PM
I don't think moving to pick 6 will take a 1st and a 3rd. They are looking WR and will get their pick of the lesser Jones at 9...I think a first and 3rd would be more believable.

D-Unit
03-24-2011, 02:06 PM
If Jerry could pull it off for a 1st and 3rd, I would praise him forever.