Viewing 22 reply threads

  • Author

    Posts

    • michael89156

      Participant
      Post count: 3229

      Could Texans land both Jadeveon Clowney, Blake Bortles?By Chris Burke    SI.comApril 19  2014bortles_zps7bd14655.jpgA trade back into the first round could net the Texans both Jadeveon Clowney (left) and Blake Bortles. (Stacy Revere/Getty Images) To this point, through my previous six 2014 NFL mock drafts (seven, if you count the adjustments made on Mock 3.1 when Marcus Mariota decided to stay at Oregon), I have kept things pretty straightforward. No longer. Blame the NFL for making us wait an extra two weeks for the actual draft, if you will, but in hopes of mixing things up — and of recreating a draft that more closely resembles its real-life counterpart — I pulled the trigger on a few hypothetical first-round trades. Six trades, to be exact, three made by teams looking to land their next quarterback. This year’s draft shapes up as one of the most unpredictable in recent memory. A first round like the one that follows would shoot the excitement factor through the roof: 1. Houston Texans: Jadeveon Clowney, DE, South Carolina The Texans have held the No. 1 overall pick twice in their history. They used the first, as an expansion club, on David Carr; the second, four years later, on Mario Williams. Obviously, riding defense there worked out better for them. That’s not to say that Teddy Bridgewater or Johnny Manziel or Blake Bortles would be a total bust as the No. 1 pick, or that Clowney is a sure bet — there really are no guarantees when it comes to the draft. Coaching staffs and GMs hang their tenures on top-10 QBs, though, so to draft one a team has to be totally sold, beyond a shadow of a doubt. Even if the Texans have a hankering for Bortles, they don’t seem to have reached that level quite yet. In Clowney, they may be drafting the league’s next great defensive superstar. Pairing him with J.J. Watt off the edge would turn the Texans into a borderline unblockable pass-rushing machine. This is the safest, smartest pick in this spot. sammy_zpsab5ed372.jpg2. TRADE: Tampa Bay Buccaneers (from St. Louis via Washington): Sammy Watkins, WR, Clemson *Buccaneers send picks 7, 38 and a 2015 second-rounder to St. Louis for pick No. 2 In the words of Michael Keaton’s Batman, “You wanna get nuts? C’mon! Let’s get nuts!” The Falcons have been discussed as a likely trade-up candidate, with their eyes on either Clowney, Khalil Mack or an offensive tackle. Detroit, too, has been floated as a possible aggressor during Round 1, a Calvin Johnson-Golden Tate-Sammy Watkins receiving corp revving the fan base there. But Tampa Bay needs a receiver worse than Detroit does after dealing Mike Williams. Plus, not so quietly, the Buccaneers have undergone a Lovie Smith-led roster shake-up this offseason, leaving them with far fewer holes than a team picking at No. 7 ought to have. It all adds up to Tampa Bay throwing caution to the wind and nabbing Watkins, giving new QB Josh McCown a Watkins-Vincent Jackson pairing to work with in what would be a dangerous passing game. 3. Jacksonville Jaguars: Khalil Mack, OLB, Buffalo Basically, the same spiel from Houston’s No. 1 pick can be copied over here. In his last mock draft, SI’s Don Banks wrote: “They are conducting pre-draft visits with every big-time quarterback, but mark it down, the Jaguars aren’t going QB. At least not at No. 3 in such a deep and talented draft …” Good enough for me. And landing Mack, an impact player to slide in as a Leo-position type in Gus Bradley’s defense, justifies waiting on a QB. 4. Cleveland Browns: Johnny Manziel, QB, Texas A&M Tough to read the tea leaves regarding which way Cleveland might be leaning at QB. One thing does appear rather certain, though: Cleveland plans to spend one of its two first-round picks at the position. Waiting until No. 26 would leave the Browns in a position to miss out on the guy they really want. With the way the top three fell here, they get their choice. Perhaps they have their eyes on Teddy Bridgewater or Blake Bortles. I’d put my money behind Manziel being the guy. 5.  TRADE: Minnesota Vikings (via Oakland): Teddy Bridgewater, QB, Louisville *Vikings send picks 8, 72, 96 to Oakland for pick No. 5 You get a trade! And you get a trade! And you get a trade! #OprahDraft The Vikings may not need to pull the trigger on this deal if just one QB falls in the top four. By doing so, they ensure that Oakland and/or any other QB wild cards (Tennessee?) do not get to climb the ladder for one of the top prospects. Minnesota may not have all the pieces in place to go win a Super Bowl, but the clock is ticking on their Adrian Peterson window. So, nabbing the most NFL-ready QB with this pick gives the Vikings their best shot to make a run in 2014 or ’15.6. Atlanta Falcons: Jake Matthews, OT, Texas A&M As luck would have it, the Falcons stay put at No. 6 — watching Tampa Bay and Minnesota leapfrog them in trades — and still get their choice of offensive tackles. Clowney or Mack might be the preferred option, but this is far from a disappointing fallback plan. If the Rams do not stay put at No. 2 and take a tackle, Matthews or Robinson are likely to be on the board for Atlanta’s pick. In Matthews, the Falcons land a more polished product for a team hoping to engineer a quick turnaround. 7. St. Louis Rams (via Tampa Bay): Greg Robinson, OT, Auburn Trade down, add a pair of second-rounders (one in 2014, one in ’15), still get the guy you might have taken at No. 2? Not bad for the Rams. There will be plenty of St. Louis fans clamoring for their team to stay put in the two-hole and just take Watkins, and there definitely is some merit to that approach. If the opportunity arises, though, to keep stockpiling picks while also addressing what was a troublesome O-line, the Rams will jump. 8. Oakland Raiders (via Minnesota): Mike Evans, WR, Texas A&M Watkins would have been a welcome addition for the Raiders, as well. Although, had they stayed at No. 5 in this mock, the pick likely would have been Jake Matthews — a plug-and-play starter at RT who could then allow Menelik Watson further time to develop, while Donald Penn locks down LT. Oakland has just six picks, however, with none in Rounds 4 or 5, which is hardly the recipe a rebuilding team wants to follow. By swapping spots with Minnesota, GM Reggie McKenzie picks up a pair of extra third-rounders (Minnesota has two, courtesy of the Percy Harvin trade). He also adds a receiver that may be right on par with Watkins to free-agent signee James Jones, forming a suddenly potent tandem. 9. Buffalo Bills: Eric Ebron, TE, North Carolina Not really the way the Bills want the board to fall, with two OTs, both of the top WRs, plus Mack and Clowney all gone. Dropping back might be an option; OT Taylor Lewan could be another one, with Buffalo in need of an upgrade on the right side of its line. The Ebron pick essentially accomplishes what the Bills would have been hoping for with Evans: adding a big, reliable weapon for EJ Manuel. Ebron is the top prospect at his position and a potential Pro Bowler in the near future. 10. TRADE: Dallas Cowboys (via Detroit): Aaron Donald, DT, Pittsburgh *Cowboys send picks 16, 47, 158 to Detroit for picks 10 and 111 Another top-10 move, this time so the Cowboys can cut in front of a few teams with D-line needs. Donald may fit a similar mold to recent Dallas addition Henry Melton, a slightly undersized three-tech. Part of the appeal of Donald, though, is that he can and has played just about everywhere on the line. He could rotate in for Melton at the three-tech or slide over to a one-tech spot and do just fine. This is a case of taking the top player available, then worrying about exactly how to employ him later. 11. Tennessee Titans: Anthony Barr, OLB, UCLA This all dropped into place rather well for the Titans, who are searching for an impact edge rusher for their new hybrid defense. They find one of the best available here in Barr, whose upside is far too high to justify any rumored stock drops that may be occurring in mid-April. 12. New York Giants: Taylor Lewan, OT, Michigan The Giants might have been tempted by Ebron or Donald, had either made it here. Heck, they might have one eye on Odell Beckham Jr. or Marqise Lee as they head to the podium with this pick. The fact of the matter remains that the Giants absolutely have to upgrade their O-line in front of an aging Eli Manning. Lewan is not far behind Matthews and Robinson — some might argue that he’s just as good.For the rest of the picks...http://nfl.si.com/2014/04/17/2014-nfl-mock-draft-houston-texans/

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 2275

      No way in hell Bortles will fall that far. Just some writer trying to get hits on his shitty mock.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 11506

      That would be nutty , alright .

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 4140

      No, but I could the 49ers doing it.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 6677

      In this mock we could have stayed put and gotten Evans if WR is the 1st round target.  I like him better anyways. 

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9276

      The one thing in this article that i agree with is this may be the most unpredictable draft in recent memory…. can’t wait to see it unfold.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 38

      The better question to ask is whether it would be worth giving up 3 high draft picks for Jadeveon Clowney, after Houston takes Manziel with the first pick.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 395

      No player is worth 3 unless your the falcons in which you cursed

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 2673

      No, but I would sure as hell like for some other team to give us three high draft picks for him.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 8983

      Hell no. It had better be for a qb if they do something like this.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 2673

      Only player worth trading up for in this draft is Clowney and even he’s not worth THREE high round draft picks.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9276

      No player is worth 3 unless your the falcons in which you cursed

      some would have you believe the 9ers should give up 5-6 picks for Watkins.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1571

      No I would not trade up for Watkins.  If we were an established team and saw him as the final piece of the puzzle then maybe, but we aren’t at that point yet and need all the picks we have.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 2673

      No player is worth 3 unless your the falcons in which you cursed

      some would have you believe the 9ers should give up 5-6 picks for Watkins.

      I feel that this may be directed at me since I just posted this scenario in a separate thread, so I will reply, but I am not speaking for other people who think they should surrender 5-6 high draft picks. So, its not that I think they necessarily should trade all those picks away for Watkins but, with how far up the draft board the 49ers must move, I think that it becomes a much more realistic possibility. That is, I think that  the 49ers would trade a handful of high-round picks away especially after considering that the 49ers are a team that is just a few plays away from a second consecutive Superbowl appearance. By the time a player from rounds 2, 3, & 4 develops into a solid contributor, the 49ers could very well be past the point of being that sort of perennial Superbowl contender. I could be wrong, but I think for a team that is in 'Win-Now' mode, San Fran is a candidate as a team that may mortgage away its future for a player that they may see as being that 'one missing piece' that is preventing them from hoisting the Lombardi in February. 

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 2775

      Never.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 4057

      No player is worth 3 unless your the falcons in which you cursed

      some would have you believe the 9ers should give up 5-6 picks for Watkins.

      I feel that this may be directed at me since I just posted this scenario in a separate thread, so I will reply, but I am not speaking for other people who think they should surrender 5-6 high draft picks. So, its not that I think they necessarily should trade all those picks away for Watkins but, with how far up the draft board the 49ers must move, I think that it becomes a much more realistic possibility. That is, I think that  the 49ers would trade a handful of high-round picks away especially after considering that the 49ers are a team that is just a few plays away from a second consecutive Superbowl appearance. By the time a player from rounds 2, 3, & 4 develops into a solid contributor, the 49ers could very well be past the point of being that sort of perennial Superbowl contender. I could be wrong, but I think for a team that is in 'Win-Now' mode, San Fran is a candidate as a team that may mortgage away its future for a player that they may see as being that 'one missing piece' that is preventing them from hoisting the Lombardi in February.

      SF is a few big time plays not a whole lot players...plus they have way too many picks. More picks than roster slots to out guys into. They might have an argument to blockbuster it up on that basis I but that is a really rare scenario.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 10626

      Love Sammy, but no, too costly. Now if we had 10 picks in this draft, then maybe. But I don’t like the 2nd next year either. It stretches the pain out even longer is it turns out to be a bad gamble.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 77

      In a word, no.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 4755

      No player is worth 3 unless your the falcons in which you cursed

      some would have you believe the 9ers should give up 5-6 picks for Watkins.

      I feel that this may be directed at me since I just posted this scenario in a separate thread, so I will reply, but I am not speaking for other people who think they should surrender 5-6 high draft picks. So, its not that I think they necessarily should trade all those picks away for Watkins but, with how far up the draft board the 49ers must move, I think that it becomes a much more realistic possibility. That is, I think that  the 49ers would trade a handful of high-round picks away especially after considering that the 49ers are a team that is just a few plays away from a second consecutive Superbowl appearance. By the time a player from rounds 2, 3, & 4 develops into a solid contributor, the 49ers could very well be past the point of being that sort of perennial Superbowl contender. I could be wrong, but I think for a team that is in 'Win-Now' mode, San Fran is a candidate as a team that may mortgage away its future for a player that they may see as being that 'one missing piece' that is preventing them from hoisting the Lombardi in February.

      If SF wants to move up from no.30 into the top 5 it will cost them dearly. Would probably have to give up all their 2nd and 3rd rounders or else next years 1st packaged with at least 3 other picks.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 4755

      I would not even give up one high draft pick for him!!!

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 1125

      I don’t want Watkins.

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 9276

      I don't want Watkins.

      even more reason to hope he falls to 7

      Please wait…

    • Anonymous

      Inactive
      Post count: 831

      I don't want Watkins.

      even more reason to hope he falls to 7

      lol

      Please wait…

Viewing 22 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.