The All-Purpose Draft thread.... | Page 103 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

The All-Purpose Draft thread....

I can understand the debate over Mims. Is he or isn't he? I'm a bit too skeptical on moving a College RT to LT as a pro. But I also see Mims' talent. Question is, Does Miami take that chance? Because it does have a higher chance of failure. If you fail, you've wasted a pick and perhaps weakened two positions? Moving Jackson back to LT comes with it own questions, in itself.
 
Mach2 said:
Going to disagree with that premise. One can be versatile, but not great at any one thing.


It's the old "Jack of all trades, master of none" situation. Not saying that is the case, just that is faulty logic if you are drafting an OL guy in rd1 and saying well, at least he's flexible.

I wasn't arguing Barton, specifically, anyway. If that's where the Dolphins go, I'm fine with it.

My point was in reference to professional evaluators. They analyi both pluses and minuses, rather than promoting an agenda by telling only one side of the story. Good evals do not include emotions.
Click to expand...
I generally espouse the jack of all trades master of none philosophy, but I don't agree it applies to Barton. Many have him listed as their top G and top C. And while I wouldn't have him as the top T, I do think he has the potential to be a very good T in our system.
 
dolfan91 said:
I can understand the debate over Mims. Is he or isn't he? I'm a bit too skeptical on moving a College RT to LT as a pro. But I also see Mims' talent. Question is, Does Miami take that chance? Because it does have a higher chance of failure. If you fail, you've wasted a pick and perhaps weakened two positions? Moving Jackson back to LT comes with it own questions, in itself.
Click to expand...
I like Mims as a prospect in general, but not for Miami. He's a bad fit and a bad bet to succeed here.
 
TXFinFan said:
Click to expand...

I generally agree with some caveats. Positional value and need are also factors that are weighed. I do believe that you're generally better off taking the best players. You don't want a bunch of lesser players that fill needs otherwise you just end up with a team of lesser players. But a great player at a typically less valuable position can still have huge, atypical impact on your team. And you can have an imbalanced team if you completely ignore your needs. So it's not as simple as many make it out to be.
 
SF Dolphin Fan said:
Kind of a Wes Welker type, no?
Click to expand...
More versatile. I think Pearsall can play anywhere. McConkey reminds me more of Welker. Insanely quick, but I do worry about his play strength. I worry that he may get pushed off routes too easily. But if McConkey could develop a relationship like Welker/Brady did then he could excel.
 
Sorry if this has been explained already but what exactly is “in game athleticism”

Vs say, how athletically they test at the combine
 
rafael said:
More versatile. I think Pearsall can play anywhere. McConkey reminds me more of Welker. Insanely quick, but I do worry about his play strength. I worry that he may get pushed off routes too easily. But if McConkey could develop a relationship like Welker/Brady did then he could excel.
Click to expand...
Raf #55 might be right in front of our nose.

We obviously are trying to add to the receiver room.

We have two hi picks then not so much

Ricky Pearsall is training with our two star receivers..have you seen footage?

If Waddle and Hill give a good thumbs up to Grier then perhaps he’s the player at 55.

Wonder if Grier is allowed to watch sessions like what Pearsall is doing with Waddle and Hill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom