DCFanatic - First round mock - V1.0

[Alexander]

I think he's an early 2nd guy, you don't take a guy at 27 overall just because you don't have a pick in the early 2nd round.

Well, there you go. "Consensus" says he's early 2nd. How early? 33-36? 37-40? Again, he could be a cusp player and when you are picking 27th, then you have to weigh how much you are looking to risk if you trade down.

I like Allen a lot, but not enough to abandon draft strategy for. Is he so much better than Morgan Burnett or Major Wright? I'm not so sure.

I think Burnett is in the same boat as Allen. I have read teams are starting to put late first grades on him too. Now Wright, absolutely not. I don't think he is even in the same league as the other two in terms of being well-rounded and having play making ability. To me, he's on the next talent tier overall with other safeties like Rashad Jones, Kam Chancellor and T.J. Ward. Just an opinion, of course.

Earl Thomas is definitely more special of a talent than Nate Allen. I struggle to see how you'd take Allen over Thomas if the two were available.

If you want a true free safety and not a puffed up CB who might not withstand the punishment, then you could debate between the two. Allen is a real physical specimen. Thomas is not quite the prototypical physical type for some teams.

 

[TheCount]

If you want a true free safety and not a puffed up CB who might not withstand the punishment, then you could debate between the two. Allen is a real physical specimen. Thomas is not quite the prototypical physical type for some teams.

I think a lot of the knock on Thomas is based purely on his height. He's answered every question within his power to answer to this point. I think any team downgrading him purely for being two inches shorter than they like will be missing out on a monumental talent.

I would be overjoyed if he's there at 27, and unless Iupati is also there, I think we'd take him in a heart beat. Maybe even over Iupati.

I don't know what it means to be a "true safety" vs a "puffed up cb", Thomas does it all. The whole, "hey may not stand up", is a valid concern for some I suppose, not for me. I can't see downgrading an excellent player because he may get injured playing football.

 

[dcfanatic]

Yeah, we have gotten too cute in the past. There are several good reasons to trade down, but many bad ones too.

The good
Obviously, if you're sitting at 27 and you don't have anyone left on your board valued that high (or within a few slots) it makes sense to trade down. I don't see that happening this year b/c there should be plenty of players left worthy of low 1st round picks...if we want them.

The next scenario is more likely is this draft:

If you still have 5-6 players that all are close to equally good to pick at 27, then trading down is a wise move if it's not too many slots (not 20+). But if there are only two guys left worthy of 27 and you trade down 10+ slots, well, that's getting a bit too cute and not worth the high risk.

After being burned three times last season this is a great point.

 

[CanuckCowboysFan]

I think he's an early 2nd guy, you don't take a guy at 27 overall just because you don't have a pick in the early 2nd round.

I like Allen a lot, but not enough to abandon draft strategy for. Is he so much better than Morgan Burnett or Major Wright? I'm not so sure.



Earl Thomas is definitely more special of a talent than Nate Allen. I struggle to see how you'd take Allen over Thomas if the two were available.

Because I think Wade would move Thomas over to CB, not play FS. Allen has some experience at CB as well but he's much more complete FS IMO. He looks the part. Its like comparing Bradford with Clausen.

 

[TheCount]

Because I think Wade would move Thomas over to CB, not play FS. Allen has some experience at CB as well but he's much more complete FS IMO. He looks the part. Its like comparing Bradford with Clausen.

So if Clausen was 2 inches taller, he'd be as good as Bradford... that's your point right?

 

[CanuckCowboysFan]

So if Clausen was 2 inches taller, he'd be as good as Bradford... that's your point right?

lmao, no thats not my point. My point is there's different opinions on different players. Bradford and Clausen are very similar in terms of pro potential and intangibles. The same for Allen and Thomas. It's a toss up between the two. I thought the Bradford Clausen debate can be related to Allen and Thomas. Where the **** did I once mention Thomas' height and compare it to Allens? 2 inches on Clausen would help his case though.

 

[Doomsday101]

Nate Allen would be a good selection. I would have no problem with it

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

So if Clausen was 2 inches taller, he'd be as good as Bradford... that's your point right?

You seem to be the one bringing up the knock of others (not sure who those people are but I see no indication of that being the people you are arguing with) is his height difference. So I am not sure how you can use that argument and transfer it to another set of players when it appears the person you are arguing with is not even using that argument.

Maybe I have missed something...or maybe you are reaching due to your assuming you know why this or that poster likes one player over another.

 

[TheCount]

lmao, no thats not my point. My point is there's different opinions on different players. Bradford and Clausen are very similar in terms of pro potential and intangibles. The same for Allen and Thomas. It's a toss up between the two. I thought the Bradford Clausen debate can be related to Allen and Thomas. Where the **** did I once mention Thomas' height and compare it to Allens? 2 inches on Clausen would help his case though.

Define "more complete"?

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

I think Brandon Graham is higher rater than Everson Griffen. And I dont think the Colts would take Carlos Dunlap and he is falling anyway

 

[TheCount]

You seem to be the one bringing up the knock of others (not sure who those people are but I see no indication of that being the people you are arguing with) is his height difference. So I am not sure how you can use that argument and transfer it to another set of players when it appears the person you are arguing with is not even using that argument.

Maybe I have missed something...or maybe you are reaching due to your assuming you know why this or that poster likes one player over another.

I think you missed something, there have been several comments on Thomas' ability to be durable in the NFL (despite the fact he has never showed a propensity for injury) and his physical attributes.

I'm not arguing with anyone. Who gives a **** what I think? Certainly not the people actually doing the drafting. I'm having a general discussion.

 

[CanuckCowboysFan]

You seem to be the one bringing up the knock of others (not sure who those people are but I see no indication of that being the people you are arguing with) is his height difference. So I am not sure how you can use that argument and transfer it to another set of players when it appears the person you are arguing with is not even using that argument.

Maybe I have missed something...or maybe you are reaching due to your assuming you know why this or that poster likes one player over another.

You're right and haven't missed anything... why he brought that up is beyond me...not once did I mention ET's height and compare it to Allens, and I'm actually one of the few that have no problem with his size.

 

[TheCount]

You're right and haven't missed anything... why he brought that up is beyond me...not once did I mention ET's height and compare it to Allens, and I'm actually one of the few that have no problem with his size.

It was actually a joke, I'll use smilies next time. You guys take this stuff way too seriously. It was also a response to the previous post's "puffed up CB" comment.

 

[CanuckCowboysFan]

It was actually a joke, I'll use smilies next time. You guys take this stuff way too seriously. It was also a response to the previous post's "puffed up CB" comment.

It might have been a joke but you were using it to support you're argument, whatever you're argument was.

 

[TheCount]

It might have been a joke but you were using it to support you're argument, whatever you're argument was.

There's no argument.

It was one sentence joke in response to your statement that Allen "looks the part".

 

[CanuckCowboysFan]

There's no argument.

It was one sentence joke in response to your statement that Allen "looks the part".

lol w.e, why you brought up that height thing is still a mystery...

and by more complete, I mean Allen can bring what Thomas brings to the table in terms of coverage and that zone/centerfielder type role, and he's also a very strong tackler and is a very good blitzer (evident by his 80 tackles this year, and 85 two years ago) which IMO Thomas lack a bit. He's also very smart and a good leader, and Wades biggest thing with Hamlin is he can get the D lined up, and I think Allen can do those things, and I think Thomas lacks those intangibles a bit as well.

 

[TheCount]

lol w.e, why you brought up that height thing is still a mystery...

and by more complete, I mean Allen can bring what Thomas brings to the table in terms of coverage and that zone/centerfielder type role, and he's also a very strong tackler and is a very good blitzer (evident by his 80 tackles this year, and 85 two years ago) which IMO Thomas lack a bit. He's also very smart and a good leader, and Wades biggest thing with Hamlin is he can get the D lined up, and I think Allen can do those things, and I think Thomas lacks those intangibles a bit as well.

I think the mystery has already been unraveled, perhaps I was wrong in assuming you were joining a conversation that was about how Thomas was a "puffed up CB" when you stated that Allen "looked the part", which suggests Thomas does not.

I think Wade could easily find things to love about Thomas, if he tried. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, as I said, I like Allen a lot.

However. You give me a choice between Allen and Thomas, and it's a no brainer. Just like I'd take Berry over Thomas. Could I be wrong? Sure. I just don't think I am.

 

[CanuckCowboysFan]

I think the mystery has already been unraveled, perhaps I was wrong in assuming you were joining a conversation that was about how Thomas was a "puffed up CB" when you stated that Allen "looked the part", which suggests Thomas does not.

I think Wade could easily find things to love about Thomas, if he tried. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, as I said, I like Allen a lot.

However. You give me a choice between Allen and Thomas, and it's a no brainer. Just like I'd take Berry over Thomas. Could I be wrong? Sure. I just don't think I am.

nope, I wasn't joining that convo with you and Alexander, just stating my own opinion.

 

[Doomsday101]

I think the mystery has already been unraveled, perhaps I was wrong in assuming you were joining a conversation that was about how Thomas was a "puffed up CB" when you stated that Allen "looked the part", which suggests Thomas does not.

I think Wade could easily find things to love about Thomas, if he tried. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, as I said, I like Allen a lot.

However. You give me a choice between Allen and Thomas, and it's a no brainer. Just like I'd take Berry over Thomas. Could I be wrong? Sure. I just don't think I am.

I would go with Thomas as well if it were between Allen and Thomas. I like both and would not be upset with either one of them

 

[casmith07]

Nate Allen would probably be a reach at 27, but it's a defensive reach. If you don't get him there, he might not be there in round 2 and then neither will Morgan Burnett, and then we're screwed and drafting OLBs :laugh2: